Find Articles On:
 TV Shows:
 Extras:

Search:

Best. Gay. Week. Ever.
by Michael Jensen

A weekly column highlighting news about gay and bisexual men in pop culture.

Friday, June 2, 2006

NAKED JOSH! NO, NOT JOSH HARTNETT
Actually Naked Josh is a Canadian show about a young man in Montreal on a quest for true love. The show just started its third season, but now Josh isn't so much interested in finding true love–which just wasn't happening–but in testing his personal boundaries in his relationships. And in this week's episode that included acknowledging his possible attraction to Glen, a gay friend. At one point Josh finds himself imagining Glen naked (after having already seen him naked several times–this is Canadian television after all and the government doesn't wet its collective pants when someone shows a nipple) and later they kissed.

True, Josh was on Xtasy at the time, but the episode seemed to leave room for the possibility of Josh exploring the notion he's bisexual. Naturally, if this were on American television Josh would also have to explore his homicidal, promiscuous side as well, but Canadians just don't understand these things.

IT'S NOT NEWS IF THERE AREN'T DRAG QUEENS
Last week, CNN international reporter Matthew Chance filed a report on a gay rights march in Moscow that turned violent. (Americablog has the link here.) Naturally the report opened with shots of drag queens from various other past gay pride marches and closed with shots of half-dressed gay men partying at other pride events. This despite the fact the Moscow march featured neither drag queens or half-naked gay guys, but just queers getting the crap kicked out of them.

No doubt CNN's recent coverage of the Hispanic marches included footage of Mexicans taking siestas and whacking pinatas while shouting “Ole!” It's really too bad CNN stooped to such shoddy and homophobic editing, as the rest of the story was quite good. But it's 2006 and gay groups have complained about such biased reporting for years now. CNN should apologize–or at least change their name to FOX news.

UM, ANDERSON? TALK LIKE THIS WON'T HELP THOSE GAY RUMORS
First Anderson Cooper refuses to address the topic of whether or not he's gay. Then he writes a memoir addressing the death of his brother as well as his reaction to the devastation wreaked by Katrina, but still making no mention of his personal life. Now he's on record telling an Entertainment Weekly reporter that he loves watching MTV's Super Sweet Sixteen, as well as a show called Tiara Girls. Well, no wonder he's not bothering to officially come out. I mean how much more out can you get?

THAT'S KARMA, BABY! BWAH HA HA HA!
In case you missed this news last month, Charles Gibson beat out Elizabeth Vargas for the job of anchoring ABC's evening news. This was great news for gay men everywhere as Ms. Vargas was the "journalist" who did a nasty hit job on Matthew Shepherd for ABC's 20/20. Matthew's mom, Judy, was so incensed she went on the record to register her disgust. Now Gene Stone has written a scathing editorial about Ms. Vargas, as well as the women's organizations who have protested her being passed over for the job. I sympathize with those groups unhappy about the lack of female anchors, but in my humble opinion Ms.Vargas doesn't deserve their support. But she can always go work for CNN.

ACTUALLY, I DISAGREE WITH BOTH OF THEM
The current print issue The Advocate carries an essay by Michael Levine, a straight Hollywood publicist who writes how the gay community is shooting itself in the foot by letting our parades include drag queens and displays of sexuality. Howard Bragman, an openly gay Hollywood publicist fires back online, saying gay pride marches are for the gays and it's the media's job to represent them accurately.

I flat out disagree with Mr. Levine about drag queens. They helped launch our movement and define everything that is out and proud. Heck, straight people dress up in drag (Eddie Murphy, Tyler Perry and on and on) and nobody gets their knickers in a twist. That being said, I think Bragman is wrong that gay pride is just for gays. That would be nice, but it's not true, and we are judged by what goes on during those marches.

I think the drag queens are something to be proud of, but the overt displays of sexuality and near naked marchers are a detriment to our fight for equal rights. They're also not child-friendly, and like it or not, our community and our supporting community now includes many families with children. If they want to join the festivities too, why should they have to try to explain to their kids about the four leather daddies dry-humping in the back of a pick-up? Besides, let's face it: far too many of the naked marchers…well, let's just say they'd look better dressed up in drag anyway! (Let the hate mail commence! Send your comments to andrew@andrewsullivan.com!)

Page 1 / 2 - Next

NOTE: AfterElton.com is not affiliated with Elton John
Thoughts? Feedback?
comments@afterelton.com
Copyright © 2006 AfterElton.com
'